Zoombombing is a crime, not a prank, prosecutors warn

A security concept so vulnerable to this should be the real crime. Kids like to troll, this has always been the case and will always be the case. I am quite annoyed the internet culture is more and more invaded by these lawyers. The internet has always and should always be built on the concept that whatever can be exploited will be and the people who open themself to exploits carry the majority of blame. Maybe that's just my wishful thinking for a more wild west anarchistic internet...

&gt; disrupting a public meeting, computer intrusion, using a computer to commit a crime, hate crimes, fraud, or transmitting threatening communications<p>Uhh majority of those seem highly dependent and mostly disconnected from the actual zoomboming act and moreso with what you do once you&#x27;re in the session.<p>Also, I&#x27;m not sure offhand what all entail &quot;computer intrusion&quot;, but from my brief reading here[0], it seems that they must he stretching the definitions. Are you really &quot;hacking&quot; if you just join a meeting that someone posted openly on reddit, inviting others to troll? On the other hand, I&#x27;ve heard of people being prosecuted successfully for typing &#x2F;..&#x2F; in a URL or something along those lines.<p>Not defending people who do it, at least not on principle, but I&#x27;m just wary of the application of those laws. Out of all of them the first is the only that makes any sense, but zoom meetings are public now?<p>[0]<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wklaw.com&#x2F;computer-intrusion-under-federal-law&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wklaw.com&#x2F;computer-intrusion-under-federal-law&#x2F;</a>

For a lot of kids, this is the same as ringing a door bell and running with your friends. Honestly if I were a kid today I wouldn’t be able to resist the urge to troll our remote class meetings with my friends.

This is an interesting topic. If I equate this to the physical world, would this be similar to a public town meeting being held with no security and no locked doors, then a protester walks in and starts protesting? What are the protestors typically charged with successfully?<p>This also reminds me of Gary McKinnon who logged into NASA windows servers as Administrator with a null password and no firewall. [1] He was looking for proof of UFO&#x27;s. Point being, there was no security on the systems and so Gary basically walked in as a guest. No hacking required.<p>[1] - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;uk&#x2F;2009&#x2F;may&#x2F;25&#x2F;gary-mckinnon-extradition-pink-floyd-hacker-us" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;uk&#x2F;2009&#x2F;may&#x2F;25&#x2F;gary-mckinnon-ext...</a>

&gt; Zoombombing isn&#x27;t a harmless prank; it&#x27;s a crime.<p>These are by no definition mutually exclusive, unless you’re considering the harm of over litigious prosecutors on society.

This rings as an especially empty threat. Even with account data and IP addresses, it would be costly and time consuming for the police to track down and charge the &quot;zoombombers&quot; - <i>even if</i> all the attackers were part of their jurisdiction.<p>Their effort would be better spent recommending alternative services or providing guidance for how to configure private Zoom calls.

I don&#x27;t understand why people are comparing this to realspace crimes. I get that we have plenty of laws covering them, but the online world is completely different. It&#x27;s possible for people to commit cybercrime and still be undetected. How can you arrest someone if you can&#x27;t find them? The internet is still very much the wild west, and it needs to be treated as such, with lots of locks and keys. Doing anything less is negligence.

Key quote: &quot;Zoombombers have exposed themselves to schoolchildren and shouted racial slurs.&quot;<p>Kinda knocks down the &quot;hacker kids having harmless fun&quot; image in my book.

Here we see out of touch people supporting actions that can destroy lives, for no benefit.